Link: Abolish All 'Taxes' - NYT 4/15/08 There was an op-ed in Tuesday's NYT about changing the word "tax" to something else. It drew 150 comments before they stopped accepting comments around 6pm.
I propose we stop saying “taxes” and start calling them “dues.”
and
Consider that “tax” comes from the Latin for “appraise” with punitive overtones of “censure” or “fault,” as if wage-earners have done something wrong by their labors. “Dues,” in contrast, is rooted in social obligation and duty.
It ends with
So this will be an uphill struggle. But we need language to remind us that this is our government, and that we thrive because of the schools and transit systems and 10,000 other services that exist only because we have joined together. Instead of denouncing taxes, politicians would do better to appeal to the patriotic corners of our hearts that warm to phrases like “we the people.” “Taxation” is a throwback to the time when kings picked our pockets. “Paying my dues,” a phrase popularized in the jazz music world, is language by which we can stand together as Americans.
In all the 150 or so comments, there was no suggestion that perhaps our taxes -- our dues, if you will -- are based on the wrong thing.
We should not be asked to pay taxes on our wages. We should not be asked to pay taxes on even our "capital" gains, if they are truly "capital." (I've put "capital" in quotes because most capital gains tend to be LAND gains; capital tends to depreciate.
A phrase from the Bible comes to mind. Jesus' advice to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's might logically be interpreted as the thought that the taxes under Old Testament land laws were taxes on land value, and that those taxes were collected for the community, to fund the common spending. Caesar was not part of the community, and thus Jesus was (carefully) saying that nothing need be rendered unto him as an outsider.
For what activities should we be assessed a tax? I'd argue that privatizing a piece of nature is one of them: the land we call our own causes us to owe to our community a payment equal to the annual value of that land. Those should be our dues.
When we take from the finite store of natural resources some oil, or copper, or natural gas, don't we owe something to the commons -- not just to the individual who has title to the land above those resources?
If we put more of our tax burden on those who draw from nature's scarce resources, we would not be stealing the product of anyone's labor. If we based our local and state taxes on the economic rent of land, which is created by the presence and investment of the community as a whole, we would have an excellent funding source. And we could reduce the tax burden we place on productive activity and on buildings. All this would create a less sluggish economy, and benefit us in many different ways.
Comments